Objective Determine whether the patient-identified minimum important difference (MID) in Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) score differs from a statistically calculated estimate of MID in patients with septal deviation undergoing nasal airway surgery. Study Design Prospective cohort. Setting Tertiary academic referral center. Subjects Patients with nasal obstruction due to septal deviation. Methods Patients completed the NOSE questionnaire preoperatively and indicated the change from their baseline score that they would consider the minimum improvement required to define the septoplasty with turbinate reduction as successful. A previously published distribution-based approach was used to estimate the MID based on baseline NOSE scores. Scores were reported both as a raw score and as a percentage of patients' baseline scores. One-sample t test was used to compare the statistically estimated MID to the patient-reported MID. Results Seventy-six patients were included. The mean (SD) baseline NOSE score was 12.9 (4.03). The mean (SD) patient-identified MID was 5.3 (2.1), corresponding to a 41.1% change (95% confidence interval, 37.2-41.3) from baseline. The statistically estimated MID was 5.2 points (40.3% reduction from baseline scores). The estimated MID was not significantly different from the patient-identified MID ( P = .4). Conclusion In patients with septal deviation, an improvement of approximately 40% in their nasal obstructive symptoms as assessed by the NOSE questionnaire is required to define a nasal airway surgery as successful. The patient-identified and the statistically calculated MIDs were similar. Furthermore, this MID can be used to guide research, improving the ability to use the NOSE score as a dichotomous scoring measure (treatment success/failure) and estimating sample size.
BackgroundPlate-related complications following head and neck cancer ablation and reconstruction remains a challenging problem often requiring further management and reconstructive surgeries. We aim to identify an association between surgical site infections (SSI) and plate exposure.MethodsA retrospective study between 1997 and 2014 was performed to study the association between postoperative SSI and plate exposures. Eligible patients included those with a history of oral squamous cell carcinoma who underwent surgical resection, neck dissection, and free tissue reconstruction. Demographic and treatment related information was collected. SSI were classified based on CDC definition and previously published literature. Univariable analysis on demographic factors, smoking history, diabetes, radiation, surgical and hardware related factors; while multivariable analysis on SSI, plate height, segmental mandibulectomy defects and radiation were conducted such as using cox proportional hazard models.ResultsThree hundred sixty-five patients were identified and included in our study. The mean age of the study group was 59.2 (+/−13.8), with a predominance of male patients (61.9%). 10.7% of our patient cohort had diabetes, and another 63.8% had post-operative radiation therapy. Patients with SSI were more likely to have plate exposure (25 vs. 6.4%, p <0.001). Post-operative SSI, mandibulectomy defects, and plate profile/thickness were associated with plate exposure on univariable analysis (OR = 5.72, p < 0.001; OR = 2.56, p = 0.014; OR = 1.44, p = 0.003 respectively) and multivariable analysis (OR = 5.13, p < 0.001; OR = 1.36, p = 0.017; OR = 2.58, p = 0.02 respectively).ConclusionSurgical site infections are associated with higher rates of plate exposure. Plate exposure may require multiple procedures to manage and occasionally free flap reconstruction.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.